"Jan Drew" <jdrew1374@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:GZk8k.28679$ZE5.19385@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Myrl" <wisgroup_leader@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
news:a1e4da1e-04f0-4493-9e80-70ab6434ed85@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Jun 24, 2:13 pm, Mark Probert <mark.prob...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2008/06/23/New_pediatric_vaccine_reduc...
>>
>> The pediatric combination vaccine -- approved for use in infants and
>> children 6 weeks through 4 years of age -- is indicated for active
>> immunization against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, poliomyelitis,
>> and invasive disease due to Haemophilus influenza type b (Hib). It
>> contains no thimerosal.
>>
>> Pentacel vaccine is approved for administration as a four-dose series
>> at 2, 4, 6 and 15 to 18 months of age. The first dose may be given as
>> early as 6 weeks of age.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> Pisano said the current recommended childhood immunization schedule of
>> the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta says up
>> to 23 injections are needed by the time a child reaches 18 months of
>> age with single-entity vaccines.
>>
>> However the use of the Pentacel vaccine -- already approved in Canada
>> for a decade -- could reduce that number of shots by seven.
>>
>> -------------
>>
>> Cue the bleating and braying that their poor wittle, fragile, immune
>> systems cannot handle this. I do not expect anyone to actually prove
>> that.
>
>
> That's good news! I don't think there should be any question that
> benefits of vaccinating children far outweigh any risk from them. But
> from a health consummer stand point, anything pharmaseudical companies
> do to make vaccines safer is welcome news.
>
>
> =================================
> But, Myrl refused to answer if Mark S Probert is in FACT a proven
> liar..............
>
>>Andy posted his verse below ... apparently ignorant that he was the
>>provoker ... not Jan.
>
>
> My dictionary defines "provoker" as "someone who deliberately foments
> trouble."
> Posting a statement that you are going to ignore someone isn't one of
> provocation, as it isn't made to "foment trouble." The statement was
> posted
> explicitly to avoid trouble and alleviate trouble.
>
> Isn't it funny how someone who just accused someone else of misusing a
> word
> has
> now been shown to have been misusing a word herself?
>
>
>
>>Both Andy and Probert "reach out" to posters who don't go with their
>>"program" in their attempts to "educate" them ... I just found a
>>couple of messages from women telling me how after they posted here
>>... Andy wrote them trying to "educate" them of how bad I am (LOL) ...
>>nice job he has!
>
>
> This is the provactive statement I referred to above, Sistah Ilena. It
is
> clearly provocative to make an accusation that someone has gone behind
> someone
> else's back to undermine their credibility and then not post any proof
to
> sup****t that accusation, especially when the accused person has sworn
not
> to
> respond, and is thus unable to defend himself.
>
> This is the kind of tactic you keep in your arsenal, and one of the
> reasons
> why
> I could in good conscience no longer sup****t you.
>
>
> So now I ask you, because Brother Langer cannot, to please share with us
> your
> proof of this accusation. Please, Sistah Ilena. I would like to see
the
> e-mails that Brother Langer sent to these women.
>
>
> As Salaam Aleikum, my Sistah!
>
>
> AloysiousX
>
>
> ****
> That is Mark S Probert, Merrick,
>
>
> FACT he lied.
>
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sup****t.breast-implant/msg/822d457...
>
>
> Jan 6, 2004
>
>
> You know something, Sistah Ilena, I'm not Mark Probert
>
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/9b161d56a4...
>
>
> Jun 7. 2008
>
>
> path:
>
archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!washdc3-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!ngpeer.news.aol.com!audrey-m2.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
> Lines: 107
> X-Admin: n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From: aloysio...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(AloysiousX)
> Newsgroups: alt.sup****t.breast-implant
> Date: 06 Jan 2004 17:54:38 GMT
> References: <19faaec.0401060908.68a7...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
> Subject: Re: A New Year's Resolution
> Message-ID: 20040106125438.01826.00002...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>> Subj: Is There Some Reason...> Date: 2/12/2004 2:18:07 PM Pacific
>> Standard
>> Time> From: AloysiousX> To: JDrew63929>>> Is there some reason why you
>> won't let me ask you a few questions, Jan? > I'm> really curious about
>> your involvement with Ilena Rosenthal.>>> But I guess my most basic
>> question is whether or not you are in California> (like I am), or over
in
>> Indiana, like your profile says.>>> I had thought you were out west,
but
>> I
>> guess not.>>> As Salaam Aleikum!>>> Aloysious>
>> Mark Probert markprobert1...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
AloysiousX
>
>
> ==============================
> Mark Probert doesn't lie--now--does he, Myrl Jeffcoat?
> Now, don't forget to answer. Another Jan Drew Troll-o Meter
> is not an an answer. Btw, look on the words internet Troll.
>
|
